Quint takes a look at BRUNO!

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. Way back in March of this year Universal screened about 20 minutes of BRUNO at SXSW. They showcased three key scenes… Bruno interviewing the parents of toddler models, Bruno bringing his African “gayby” onto a Dallas talkshow and Bruno’s transformation into Straight Dave, host of an extreme fighting show being staged in Arkansas.
These scenes had me doubled over in laughter. Read my initial thoughts here, but even then Sacha Baron Cohen was up-front about the footage being much longer versions of what will end up in the final film. Having seen both I can’t help but miss the flow of the original, longer cuts. To a small degree that hurt the final product for me.
I was trying to figure out why I was getting hung up on that while watching the full film and I think it has something to do with the movie format vs. a TV show format like DA ALI G SHOW. The longer cuts felt like a more polished, bigger budgeted segment of that show and has a feeling of really being the viewer into that situation.
Now the movie is really funny, extremely graphic and kind of awe-inspiring in just how far Cohen is willing to go to find the humor. There are more than a few situations where he could have been hurt or killed with the buttons he was pushing. I still can’t believe the gigantic balls he had to track down a terrorist leader and insult the dude and his religion… in his own home!
And if nothing else Cohen really pulls back the veil and the ugly face of homophobia in this country. Not only is it brewing beneath the surface, but it is red-faced and dangerous.
There’s no doubt in my mind that homophobia is (slowly) on its way out. I remember when I first heard of the gay marriage issue in a political sense I thought it was just a talking point. “Who cares? How is this even an issue?” was my thought and a thought I believe is shared by the majority of my generation. But the fact is it is still a big issue.
I think my main problem with the movie was the need to have such a strong narrative through-line. Baron spends so much time setting up the character and those around him that the scripted stuff spills over into unscripted situations (the stuff they sell in the trailers and that everybody is showing up to see) causing many people to doubt the legitimacy of the tough spots Bruno is getting himself in to.
That said, I don’t doubt the reality of most of what goes on in the movie, at least in the people and their honest reactions to Bruno, which is all that’s really important. The whole scenario could be fake… they could be in soundstages instead of hotel rooms for instance… but what really matters is that the subject isn’t in on the joke and their reaction is honest, for good or bad (preferably bad… like Ron Paul’s overuse of the word “Queer”… because that’s a lot more entertaining).
Bruno as a character pushes a lot more buttons than Borat, but I found Borat to be a funnier character. Maybe it was fresher or maybe I just prefer the clueless foreigner to the over the top gay stereotype. And no, that’s not a slam on Cohen. Of course Bruno’s an over the top gay stereotype… that’s the point. Bruno’s the nightmare image of homosexuals that cause neo-cons to wake up screaming in the middle of the night.
That’s when the character works the best, when he’s used to make those people extremely uncomfortable and bring the homophobic anger to the surface. We see it at a Swingers party, with a group of hunters and with the scariest gathering of Ultimate Fighting fans in Arkansas they could have possibly recruited.
Bruno definitely works in that regard. It’s edgier and more political than its predecessor, but not as funny for me personally. It’s quite possible I feel this way because I saw three of the funniest sequences of the film months in advance of the movie, but I also saw the remarkable naked wrestling scene at Comic-Con before seeing Borat, so maybe that’s not the reason.
Hell, it might all come down to expectation. After diving into DA ALI G SHOW and experiencing BORAT I was so primed to see this new movie. After seeing turd after blockbuster turd this summer I kept saying “At least we have BRUNO and DISTRICT 9 to look forward to.” So maybe I had higher expectations than I should have, especially after loving that footage from SXSW.
Whatever the case, I liked the movie, but didn’t love it like I thought I would. I laughed. I was along for the ride, but it just didn’t really wow me at any point. I’ve talked with people who hated the movie, thought it was all staged, and people who love the movie from beginning to end. I ended up somewhere in the middle. What about you?
-Quint
quint@aintitcool.com
Follow Me On Twitter

A better than expected midnight run last night has projections moved up to a potential 50 million dollar opening weekend, according to Dateline Hollywood. That would be close to top 5 all time for a comedy.

I think you mean just old school, ultra religious conservatives. Neo-cons were supposedly more liberal but basically decided they're going to ONLY use military force to make other countries democratic instead of diplomacy.

...and it's much more than 'offending people and punking them'. Cohen is great in pointing out the hypocrisy in people, and baring it for all to see, including the audience. This movie forces anyone with a slightly more clever understanding of the movie than 'OMG ITS GAY BORAT' to examine their own attitude towards homosexuality, and does so in a clever, and fucking funny manner.

I found some of it disturbing. Not Bruno but what the other people did for whatever reason. Anything slightly funny or interesting was in the trailers. There is a song he records at the end with Slash, Sting, Bono and Elton John that was funny. Most of it was pieces of film that didn't seem to come together to anything you would call a film. All the stuff about the character of Bruno was lame. The rest was just to fast and not cut right or something. I laughed a few times. This girl behind me thought everything was hilarious. Borat was much funnier. A gay guy as comedy is done so often in movies and on tv that it just doesn't matter anymore. The making of the movie would be far more interesting than the actual movie.

...so, if you disagree with the gay lifestyle/marriage you're a homophobe? I'm gonna call bullshit on that one.
<P>
I'm not homophobic, I don't hate anyone. But I don't want to see two dudes making out on the street corner. It's fucking disgusting.
<P>
I will watch this movie because I laughed a shitload at Da Ali G show and I'm sure this movie will be hilarious. Cohen is an instigator and it's fun to watch that.

There was something that didn't gell for me. But I think it was more that the character is far more agressive and invasive than Borat. I was a loveable dimwit. I consider myself liberal and open and know and love many gay folk, but if someone kept trying to hump me and force me into sexual positions I'd get pretty uncomfortable. This makes it harder to laugh at some of the "victims".

and yeah, they're vocal, and some construct bullshit arguments, like "You're saying because I don't want to watch gay porn I am homophobic????"
<p>
But so what? There's room for every view point on AICN talkbacks.

Was there another naked wrestling scene in Borat that I missed?<br><br>Seriously, what was so remarkable about the naked wrestling in Borat? <br><br>I didn't find Boarat nearly as entertaining as people made it out to be. I think I'll wait and get it on netflix

I love the character and the movie was funny, but it wasn't "fresh" to me - so many reviewers are saying Bruno lacks that aspect that Borat had, but those of us who already religiously watched Da Ali G Show didn't find Boratparticularly fresh. I actually prefer the show, frankly.<i>Anyway I guess I'm saying I expect about the same from this movie. I saw the clip on Letterman where *SPOILER* he tells the terrorist that Osama Bin Laden looks like a "dirty wizard" and it was fucking awesome. So far so good.

Cohen has set the/his target on America, because that is (or seems to be) where people are reacting to the things he does like they do... BORAT wasn`t that big in Europe. Whatever he does it siöply works better in America because truth be told soöe people over there are simply...oblivious to what is going on in the world (not a general diss...just an observation)

I am totally 100% against the idea of gay marriage and homosexuality in general, but I'm not going to discriminate the people who follow that lifestyle. They made a choice, they can keep that choice. It is their life. I hate the idea, not the people following it. That DOES NOT make me scared of gay people, which, by definition, is exactly what "homophobia" means.

It sounds like the majority of the folks punk'd aren't hypocrites. Of course most creepy hunter/redneck types don't like gays. Duh. Showing that they don't like gays doesn't display hypocrisy. Go after the folks that claim they're okay with it.

most of you guys DEFINITELY fit the definition of "atavistic douchebag."<p> "They made a choice, they can keep that choice." You honestly think that gay people are just being contrarian? "Pussies are so mainstream. I'm turning gay!" Scientifically proven or not, it IS something you're born with. Which is why movies like Bruno, which force you to look your demons in the eye and deal with the fact that these guys are here to stay, are only a good thing. <p>Heterosexual imagery is thrust into people's faces all the time, whether they like it or not. The only reason why gay imagery inspires feelings of revulsion in some people is due to its unfamiliarity... You reckon if you saw a hardcore gay porn movie every day for three months you'd feel quite so disgusted at the end of that? <p>We're at a crossroads here, not unlike the time of the Suffragettes. It's up to you to choose whether you're going to surrender to that thing inside you holding the world back, or realise that these guys are people, same as you. <p>Vive la Rose Revolucion!

who doesn't present a tent when seeing two or more girls making out. and having grown up in an evangelical church i can definitely tell you that the boys and men in those churches are freaks. they are like dogs around a bitch in heat. that's why they hate gay people. they are so out of control of their sexual impulses that they are terrified that they get boners for pretty boys.

They are most definitely people. We are all human beings here. That was never up for discussion. I simply said I disagree with the way that they live their lives, but I'm not going to stop them from living it. And how can something be a fact if it has never been proven?

The vast majority of the population is hetero, hence most of our media is hetero aimed. If there are 50 green people living in a building, and only 2 blue people, doesn't it make sense that most of the traveling salespeople that come to that building would be selling products made for green people? (Also, that is the weirdest analogy ever, but it is still true.)

Share the same taste. That's were some of the hate and anger comes from. I'll say it again. There are gay people out there in the world and you wouldn't know they were gay, unless they told you. Then you have another type of gay- The one who so insecure that they push their sexuality in your face, and they take on the traits of the opposite sex to cope and feel better about themselves. It's no different than the macho types who are also insecure so they man up to 11 and they pump weights all day or they do mixed martail arts crap hoping that they project some sort of better than the average man about themselves.
<P>
The reactions in Burno are coming from people who are Disturbed, stressed out, and angry over the aspect of being forced to bare witness to sexual aspects of a homosexual lifestyle. It doesn't make you a homophobes if you are disturbed and disgusted by the act of homosexuality.
<P>
If makes you a homophobe when you don't respect the people who choose the lifestyle. Bruno is about baiting people into seeing and being a part of things that don't any any comfort level with. Things you couldn't pay them to see, so to say. So really is it homophobic for them to be angry that they are being tricked/pulled into watching some really gay sex and sexual related acts and topics that offend them. That's how I see this. I have nothing against gay people. But I really don't like the ones who push their lifestyle down your throat. The one who pick on you by flirting or speaking about the acts and doing suggestive shit around you. Thats akin to sexual harassment and sexual disrespect in my book. Your offended and creeped out. That's a normal feeling. What if all those unknowing people were kids. Not a sinlge one of them an adult. Then how would this film play out. How would you look at it then.

Eight states have laws recognizing civil unions. If the goal is to get equal legal rights for gays, why not just push more states to recognize civil unions and make them legally equivalent to marriages? The whole "gay marriage" crusade smacks less of equal rights than of gays getting even with straight society by destroying one of its central institutions.

Not to lambast Calvin Klein for his "straight agenda" (sounds pretty retarded when turned around, doesn't it?), but just to point out that people fear the unknown. It's human nature to get used to just about anything if exposed to it enough, and even if it takes three Gay Pride parades a week, why by hook or by crook we'll drag you into the future kicking and screaming!<p> And as a bisexual person, I can tell you that one doesn't simply sit down and decide to be gay. It's innate. I'm not sure if it's even possible to prove something like that in the scientific sense. Putting aside the fact that people conduct tests/polls etc. to promote certain agendas, it'd be like trying to prove that grossly obese people have little willpower. It's pretty obvious, but not so easily to definitively prove.<p>
S'far as "their lifestyle," besides the buggery, I'm not sure I know what you mean... You think that every single gay person, without exception, goes to their local Blue Oyster every night to pick up a new guy?

That's a cop out!!!!!!!!!! Are Pedophiles born that way? OK, see now that upsets people. Because now they think I'm saying that Pedophiles are no different than Gays. Let me pre-defend myself here. <P>
No, I'm not saying that. I am however saying that if sexually is inherited in birth. Then those creepy fuckers who want to fuck kids were probably born with it too, same for those people that fuck animals, or family members. Being born with it shouldn't be a defense plan! Your gay, who cares... There's nothing you need to do to defend the lifestyle. It's what you're into. You're not fucking kids, family or animals, your or hurting anyone. So really it's a non issue, but stop saying it was something you were born with. It's opening up a loophole system, for people who hurt and exploit others.

July 10, 2009, 5:56 p.m. CST

by Bob X

I don't know if you people are being funny or if you really don't know what homophobia is. If you're "disgusted" by 2 dudes making out then yeah, you're a homophobe. If you say you hate the homosexual "lifestyle" (lol), you're a homophobe. In fact, if you use the word "lifestyle" instead of "sexual orientation", you're not only a homophobe, you're most likely a moron.

are usually so damn extreme is to make it easier to tell one gay person from another. Considering the level of hate directed at gay people- not surprising when you consider "gay" is a common playground insult- slip-ups can be risky.

[Heh heh. There's an attention grabbing subject line] if you're celibate, which I'd imagine most pedos are. It's when they actually go and consummate their sexuality at the expense of some poor kid that they become monstrous. Yeah, I think if you're born with paedophilia, you just happened to have been dealt a shitty hand... Deal with it. Just stop thinking about sex and take up croquet or something instead.

Meaning what... You couldn't accidentally stick your dick in a pussy with the lights off. Sex is a lifestyle. When desperate people are willing to cut a hole in a cantaloupe melon to get off. It's a lifestyle. Speaking as a guy. If we had to list all the things we stuck our dick into to get off. It wouldn't work on any form labeled "Orientation". There's to much variety in our developmental/despirational sexual history to do that.
so now the gays want to make lifestyle a racist and ignorant terminology. Fuck.... You can;t be African American if you grew up in America, anymore than i can be eastern European American. Sometimes people just love to piss each other off. Respect, give me a break already.

Is your name "bob" or is that what you do?<P>And only a moron would generalize people the way you did in your post! Why didn't you add, anyone who doesn't see this movie is a homophobe? Or people that walk on the left side of the street are homophobes? Or.....

I really, really didn't think Bruno was funny. At all. I was so bored most of the time that I almost left half way in. I definitely question the authenticity of about 60% or 70% of the movie. The best scenes were definitely the hunters and the UFC thing. The UFC thing had me a little freaked out actually. Those guys in the crowd were probably the scariest, most hate filled people I have seen in a long, long time. I give the movie props for exposing the hatred, but man, it just wasn't funny.

I know that I made that decision in my teens and never went back. I think that "born that way" is a cop out. And we've had 50 years of science to try and prove it. But anyway, I like to stir it up. And another thing- I'm disgusted by a male and female making out, so I must be a heterophobe! I'm not afraid of them, but whatever... I don't think of my choice as being one of attaction to men, but repulsion towards vajayjay so I must be a pussophobe.

To answer that "why" -- it's because you're an idiot. There is no homosexual "lifestyle" that can be said to apply even to a vast majority of homosexuals, let alone all of them. If you really are so bothered by the idea of two men making out, you're a homophobe, plain and simple.<br><br>I will come right out and say I think it's totally fair for straight guys to say they don't want to see this movie after hearing it has lots of erect cock (apparently) in it, that's ok by me if you want to avoid that. But there's no excuse for outright abhorrence at the thought of two people who love one another kissing. That's retarded. I don't go into spasms of grossness when I see an overweight person make out with someone, I just think wow that's unattractive and I MOVE THE FUCK ON.

Sure, it wasn't as classic as Borat, but there was PLENTY of funny material to return to in this one. Just going over the movie in my head now there's at least 20 instances where I laughed my ass off. That makes it pretty great in my book. But for the record, my favorite comedy this year is Funny People (saw a screening last month in Woodland Hills). Apatow has gone to a different place than he normally does with this one, and I came out of it very, very satisfied.

It's depressing how many people will throw out all reason and most of their values in order to continue to support Ron Paul. The guy's an assclown. He's like Bill O'Reilly except he occasionally makes a pretty speech about supporting the Constitution...even as he's illustrating that he doesn't even have a 1st-graders understanding of what The Constitution actually says. On the one hand, I'm looking forward to him being made to look silly by Bruno and on the other hand, I recognize that Bruno is far too late for that.

looks absolutely awful. Rogan is getting played out (oversaturation...), Sandler hasn't been funny in a decade, and Jonah Hill was unfunny from the beginning.<br><br>I'm willing to listen, but how on earth can it possibly be good?

LOL.... wow, that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Even if you ARE pro-gay marriage, sheesh, people grow up and make decisions. Some men like women, some men like men, some men like kids, and some men would prefer to be a monk and live in solitude for eternity. It's called choice.

"gay people are fucking disgusting...but I'm not a homophobe!"<p>let's try this. "black people are horrible, but I'm not racist!!"<p>jesus, at least we console ourselves with the knowledge that you're all going the way of the dodo. your grandkids will look back at you the way we look back at racist grandparents nowadays. just don't let your knuckled get caught in the doorstop on the way out.

Ok you're gay, that cool. You don't have to be cocky about it. I love masturbating in front of a mirror, but I'm not gonna start proclaiming how I'm a minority and demand the same rights as people who know what to do with their ding-o-lings.

I am getting really tired of that "homophobia" slur. A "phobia" means fear. But because people are not for homosexuals' radical call for expanded "rights" does not now, nor has it ever meant that we somehow "fear" homosexuals. Indeed, Sacha Baron Cohen's steady stream of one-trick pony jokes recycled from the much funnier Ali G Show should be proof enough that we're just plowing the same ground here and there's very little new or for that matter persuasive that he's offering.

permanently, will make it a much better place. People who hate gays simply should not have the right to exist and should be put down as painlessly as possible. A quick blast to the back of the head and the world is a slightly better place. Rinse, repeat till they're all gone. Cohen is a prophet.

ahem,Bruno is more consistently funny than Borat,although i prob laughed harder during Borat. Bruno went by very fast and there were really no lulls of unfunny bits. I highly recommend seeing it. please support Cohen,because he is funnier than anyone right now. plenty of range. peace and go to Pink Cheeks and get your asshole bleached. Ein film der Bruno ist wunderbar!

We need to ADVANCE as a race, so us humans need to take our future into our own hands and make the world a better place. Homophobia has NO place in this new utopia. Hunt those faggot-haters down, Round 'em up and gas 'em out. Make the world a better place, for you and for me and the entire human race. All hail prophet cohen and his wise ways.

I honestly haven't seen any stats recently. Feel free to post some links if you've got 'em. Either way, I'm pretty sure they aren't packing too many numbers, especially when you factor in numbers of heteros whom are also expanding.
<p><p>If you have 100 blue people in a room, and 5 pink people in a room... and the pink people recruits a 5 new pink members every year while the blue population is *ALSO* expanding, the pinks will never put a huge dent in the majority. You get the idea.

I am a happily married man. If an unknown and flamboyantly straight woman approached me in public and began an overtly sexual conversation or interaction, I would be visibly uncomfortable and recoil. That discomfort would be magnified if I were being filmed. I suppose that makes me a heterophobe--possibly even a closet heterosexual. And the woman should be hailed as a genius for holding a mirror up to my prejudice.

but you can whip off the domain name of a gay site right off the top of your head?
<p>
And if pink people are expanding - or reproducing - the same as blue people, wouldn't the percentage stay about the same instead of increasing?

Yeah, okay, we get it. Yer not "homophobic" could you could whip the ass (pardon the pun) of any limp-writsted queer you saw sashaying up the steet. You AIN'T afraid of ANY homo. Noted. Thank you. However, when things are labeled a "phobia", it doesn't always mean fear. It can also mean aversion. As in "I dislike it SO much, I hate it." For instance, I'm what you might called "cabbage-phobic". Don't like cabbage, never will. But if bet I could beat the daylights of out of any head of cabbage that might cross my path. But do I have an "aversion" ("a strong dislike" according to Oxford's dictionary) towards cabbage? Yes, sireee! So, kiddos, when you espouse "me no like homos" talk, and someone retaliates, and calls you "homophobic", THAT'S what they're talkin' about. You DON'T fear it, you just have a strong dislike of it. Well, that's my say. Not like I think this is going to change anyone's mind. I still really want to see "Bruno" but I'll wait until DVD. I doubt it's a big, loud, FX extravaganza best seen in IMAX. Like "Borat", I think I laughed just as much as if I'd seen it in the theater. And I saved a few bucks. Which, in our current economy, means something. As you kids say, or used to say, "Peace out". And if you flame me, just know you're yapping back to a full-fledged queer. Just as I know these words won't "convert" you, your words won't do anything more than make me shake my head. So, uh, peace out, ya know?

of course im talking about my reaction when watching 2 dudes kiss or fuck each other in the ass. its my decision no more than its their decision to be gay. get over it.<p>by the way, if two gay dudes want to bang each other in the ass with rings on, great. i dont care. i get that they just want equality and all that, but marriage is fucking nuts either way. it really is a non-issue.<p>anyway, i have a phobia of idiots, of which there are many here. stupid people, gay or straight, are truly scary.

did it ever occur to any of you assholes that both may be true? granted, the bible thumpers probably couldnt accept that, but it seems to me people are gay for various reasons. how else do you explain Anne Heche or prison rape? the flamboyant ones definitely arent desperately pretending they dont like chicks. does it even fucking matter?

A voice of reason here. Now, to everybody else, could ya' all get back to talking about the DAMN MOVIE??!! Cripes... That's what this site IS devoted to, remember? Movies. Ya, I know, I violated that edict as well. Movies, folks. MOVIES!

Trombley crept to the edge of the ranger grave and looked down at Person. Person's chest rose and fell in the humid Iraq summer air. For a moment Trombley lingered and watched the pulse of life flow through the man's arteries, a vivid sign of all that is flesh and living. Ray might've annoyed Trombley during the day, but here at night his small frame seemed to be calling out to him.<p>
In the last firefight the convoy had been Oscar Mike and Iceman had mentioned the killer instincts in this Whiskey Tango sitting there behind him with the SAW. The journalist scribbled it down. Trombley shifted in his MOPP suit, trying to hide the enormous boner he was getting. He tried to cover the erection with his SAW but then he wouldn't be watching his sector, so he leaned forward out the window, hoping that damned liberal faggot from Rolling Stone wouldn't catch the chubb he'd been harboring since combat.<p>
Just then Rudy pulled his HMMW abreast, with his shirt off, wearing only a bandolier of grenades.<p>
Whopper Junior was going to have one hell of a combat jack that night. One hell of a combat jack.<p>
But as he looked at Person he was scared of the man's hidden strength, so he wandered off looking for Encino Man and Captain America. Two men he could take by force. And he'd ask Casey Kasem to film it. Kasem, who hoarded all the night vision goggles for his dildos...

Your blasting an elderly Ron Paul for being offensed at a complete stranger taking his clothes off while standing by the door acting like it's locked. Id like to see your reaction if someone complete stranger did that to you. Genuine homophobia sucks but it's easy for you idiots at AICN to lambast people who are put in the crosshairs. What comes out of your stupid mouth when no one is around?

This was one outrageous film. Cohen could rename this revenge of gay people. The whole film was one setup to fuck with straight people who look down on gay people after another. African Americans in Texas booing him for saying he's gay in one moment then gasping in shock at his racism without even for a second realizing how hypocritical they are in their outrage. Christians who think they can cure gayness talking about women like they are just pains in the ass that men have to endure. Spouses having an orgy but acting shocked and horrified at the idea of a gay person hitting on them... while they group lick a woman on the floor and fuck each other's spouses in front of each other. A crowd of psychotic violence junkies who completely lose their shit seeing two men make out... they can't stop themselves from watching, but they are watching while outraged... moments earlier they were led in a chant that asses are for pooping only. A wonderful roast of the absurdity of homophobia and bigotry against gay people. The best part was seeing the crowd so easily being led into chanting that asses are only for pooping. What complete sheep. If they can be led to chant about poop so easily it's hard to take anything they are outraged by seriously.

This was one outrageous film. Cohen could rename this revenge of gay people. The whole film was one setup to fuck with straight people who look down on gay people after another. African Americans in Texas booing him for saying he's gay in one moment then gasping in shock at his racism without even for a second realizing how hypocritical they are in their outrage. Christians who think they can cure gayness talking about women like they are just pains in the ass that men have to endure. Spouses having an orgy but acting shocked and horrified at the idea of a gay person hitting on them... while they group lick a woman on the floor and fuck each other's spouses in front of each other. A crowd of psychotic violence junkies who completely lose their shit seeing two men make out... they can't stop themselves from watching, but they are watching while outraged... moments earlier they were led in a chant that asses are for pooping only. A wonderful roast of the absurdity of homophobia and bigotry against gay people. The best part was seeing the crowd so easily being led into chanting that asses are only for pooping. What complete sheep. If they can be led to chant about poop so easily it's hard to take anything they are outraged by seriously.

Ron Paul was a douche for using the term Queer and getting so offended by someone gay hitting on him: however, Cohen was just trying to humiliate Paul and if Paul hasn't shown a history of gay bigotry, then Cohen shouldn't have gone after him with this. It's obvious that Cohen choose Ron Paul to make a Ru Paul joke. Ron Paul is still a dick for calling a man he thought was gay a queer, but you gotta give him some slack because Cohen took his pants off in the room. Although... what the fuck was wrong with Paul that he let the whole thing go on as long as he did.

If anyone lures me into a room under the pretense that they are going to interview me, and then tries to seduce me, then it's WRONG behavior.......if I am around someone who is clearly a sexual deviant, regardless of what sex the person is, then I don't want that person anywhere near me.......you may call it homophobia......but I call it a normal human response.......you are truly a degenerate if you find this behavior normal! Do you people have no moral absolutes? How many of you are sucking a stranger's cock tonight??

But being told that I am homophobic because I don't want a homosexual acting like a sexual predator around me is another. DO NOT LABEL THE PEOPLE IN THIS MOVIE AS HOMOPHOBIC!!! If Bruno was straight and acted this way around women then he would rightfully be accused of sexual harassment and the National Organization for Women would have him blacklisted.

..who voted for Prop 8? Aha. Didn't think so. Another hypocritical poser spewing social commentary. Though I must admit that a Hollywood actor preaching to audiences about morality and hypocrisy is sure-fire comedy. Oh, the irony!!!!

I believe people are born straight or gay, just as they are born black or white. it's just easier to hide being gay, especially when close minded cultures tell you there's something wrong with you.<p>and lesbian couples often have children biologically, through various means. and many gay male couple adopt children who are in need of a loving home. not to mention, with overpopulation running rampant, do we really think that having as many children as possible is a litmus test for contributing to society?<p>not to mention the BILLIONS of dollars for small business that would be created if gay marriage were legalized...but of course, we don't need that type of help now, right?<p>much better we keep our blinders on and pretend gay people "choose" to have sam sex partners because they love the delicious blend of intolerance and lack of civil rights.

um, Borat went after women telling them that their brains were smaller than mens'...and people realized then that it was a joke. not every gag in this movie is about exposing homophobes, just as not every gag in Borat was about exposing anti-Semitism. sometimes, it's just about the funny. so until you've seen the movie, relax.

Actually, I saw the movie tonight.....and I come home and read Quint say that this movie exposes a lot of homophobia in this country because people were offended by a gay man coming on to them......I strongly disagree!!!

Gays' attempt to hijack the civil rights movement in order to cast themselves as similarly noble victims is about as shit-dumb as you can get. They reaaalllllllllly need to give it all a rest. It's like that Simpsons cartoon where the Simps are watching a gay pride parade. Some of the nuts in it are prancing around yelling "We're here, we're queer, get used to it!" and Lisa yells "You do this every year! We ARE used to it!" LOL! Some of us are not only used to it, we're damned sick of it. So no I won't be seeing this stupid flick. Which oddly enough, puts me in the same corner as GLAAD. Seems that gang of Rainbow Brites hate this film too. Go figger...

If you think gay people just woke up one day and decided to be ostracized and ridiculed by soceity then sure, align yourselves with the same hypocrites featured in Bruno. If you don't understand what being gay is, that's fine, but don't use outdated terminology and put yourself in a category of flat earth thinkers.

You telling me that without a marriage license gays can't overspend and ruin their credit just like the rest of us? Gimme a break. They can go on honeymoon cruises and even have a ceremony at Disney World if they want to. I've heard some lame arguments for gay marriage but that takes the urinal cake. Feh.

i couldnt care less. why would i be terrified? like any gay person will tell you, sexual preference is not a choice. i LOVE pussy. LOVE IT. in fact, i dare say there is nothing i love more.<p>is it also a choice that i find two chicks making out pretty damn hot? why would i decide that is hot. same with two dudes. it just grosses me out. leanr to tolerate it like i tolerate every one else.

from US News and World Report:<p>
"A recent study conducted by the Congressional Budget Office found that if all 50 states and the federal government extended the rights and obligations of marriage to same-sex couples, gay weddings would generate almost $1 billion in revenue each year. According to other estimates, same-sex marriages could tack on more than $16 billion annually to the $70 billion wedding industry."<p>I have the pdf file of the whole Congressional Budget study if you'd like.<p>being wrong is tough, I know. but you gotta own it and move on...

if you pay good money to see something but instead you get gay sex, and you get mad, you are anti-homosexual. <p>if you get locked in a room with some asshole constantly hitting on you, and you dont like it, you are a anti-homosexual.<p> if you are having a straight orgy because you are straight and some guy wants to ram your ass and you dont want him to, you are a anti-homosexual. anything else?<p> no wonder GLAAD is against this movie. he isnt pointing out rampant anti-homosexual people (in many cases). this isnt satire you idiots, its just punk'd the movie.

it isn't just that people are politely declining gay sex that makes them homophobic, it's the fear and anger and outright RAGE that some people feel when confronted by homosexuality that makes them so.<p>if I were married, and a woman came on to me, I would politely decline. if I were married and a gay man came on to me, I would also politely decline. yelling about queers and writhing in utter contempt and disgust wouldn't enter into it. that's the difference.<p>as it has been pointed out, the Bruno character isn't meant to be simply a "normal" gay character to show the hidden cameras what happens when gay and straight people meet. it's a grandiose, over the top, flamboyant portrayal, in order to get as wild a reaction from each person as possible. and you can call that trickery or conceit, of course it is, but it's meant to be FUNNY. just as Borat was over the top, so is Bruno.<p>Cohen himself stated, when asked if the "throw the jew down the well" country music singers in the bar were anti-semetic, "maybe, but probably not. they were probably just complacent and indifferent." and that's the whole point of ALL of this:<p>sure, two guys making out in a cage, instead of a cage fight is ridiculous. but if I PERSONALLY saw that, I would laugh and go, "this is nuts! what is going on!?" I wouldn't have the urge and rage to hurt someone. just like with Borat, it was about how far you can push an ordinary person with outlandish behavior, before they show you just how outlandish they will allow themselves to be when they think they're in safe territory.<p>so is everyone in this movie that is disgusted and repulsed and afraid of Bruno's behavior homophobic? well, maybe not. but they certainly don't deal with it in the same way they would deal with similarly outlandish behavior from a straight person. and that's the point.

Very profound. "...And if nothing else Cohen really pulls back the veil and the ugly face of homophobia in this country. Not only is it brewing beneath the surface, but it is red-faced and dangerous." Enough with the condescension! How about a review, not an AFTERSCHOOL SPECIAL. It's a no thinker! Yeah, ignorance breeds hatred. Surprised? I mean, this whole Eugene Levy routine...

except that people keep wanting to put this guy on a pedestal for being on some righteous crusade, when, like you say, he's just punking people for laughs. also, not everyone in his movies are racist/anti-homosexual/anti-semitic, yet they are portrayed that way. this has to hurt people. i do have a problem with that.

took the entire audience completely offguard and literally had everyone in the theater erupting in laughter. When the penis screamed "BRUNO!" at the end, it just sent everybody over the edge. I don't believe I've heard that much laughter in a theater since Jackass.

and the rednecks...well, you know...<p>honestly, I don't think many people are holding him up to be a paragon of gay rights. I think that's a construct of people not knowing the point/humor of it. Borat was not advancing the cause of Jewish people, just by exposing the humorous and ridiculous nature of latent anti-semitism. it was just food for thought. same with Bruno. it ain't changing the world, it's just humor.

My basic problem is that Borat, as a character is funnier than Bruno. The reason is that Borat is rude and ignorant, and the humor comes from how long people will be patient with him.
Bruno, on the other hand, is all about seeing how quickly he can piss you off. And that is sometimes funny, and sometimes not.
Him being a dick to the guy who, for a living, turns gay people straight? Well, that is awesome. That guy is a complete douche, and he deserves to be openly mocked.
But when he came back to the hunter's tent naked? That guy had been pretty patient with him, and only got angry when Bruno showed up naked. And I don't blame him. That is, legally speaking, sexual assault.
That has nothing to do with homophobia. That has to do with a guy being woken up twice in the middle of the night, with the second time by a naked guy. I'd have been pretty pissed by that as well. Not because he's gay, but because I told him "no" and he came back naked.
The wrestling scene is awesome, and when the dancing dick came on during the test screening, I just about puked I was laughing so hard.
Unfortunately a large part of this movie felt very staged, and too much time was spent on the scripted stuff. I enjoyed it, but I won't revisit it, because it just isn't funny enough.

Your 'born with it' post is almost a verbatim replaying of a convo I had with a friend of mine just half an hour ago.<p>
Playing devil's advocate on gay marriage rights [and extending Pilgrim's born with it line], what if tomorrow someone says they want to marry their sheep and want all marriage rights for that? Homosexuality is all about sexual behaviour/preference, deviant or not.<p>
Heck, imagine all the geeks living in mom's basements wanting marriage rights between 'man and his hand'. O:

You have to watch Bruno like you watch The Colbert Report. Otherwise... you aren't going to get it. You'll just either be laughing at apparent silliness or you'll be outraged by apparent perversion. Nothing is simple. Nothing is obvious. Everything requires taking some time to think about what happened. This is not a film to experience. It's a question for you to ponder. If you get offended by this film you are who this film is asking the question about.

Being a homosexual, which I am not. I have seen phobic misunderstanding from all parties involved. Why does sex between two adults matter? Why cant it be funny? Why make it political? Who cares about a piece of paper? Who cares and who needs to know how you like it in the sack? There are lots of hicks and bigots. But let me say they are not all repubs. One day we wont care what two adults do in their free time. One day we will realize, and see, that God will judge us indiv-idually.

Right now we decide that what the majority considers Marriage to be is Marriage. One man and one woman. Some claim that this is based on Judeo/Christian traditions. They don't know what they are talking about. Judeo/Christian traditions have always been one man and as many wives and concubines as he could afford. One man and one woman is pretty recent in the history of Judeo/Christian traditions. Not even really recent enough to be considered a tradition in my book, but, that's beside the point. The point is... Marriage has always been defined by people the way they want to define it. And we continue to redefine marriage. Until very very recently, even one wife was considered to be property of a husband. This equality in Marriage is really really new. Anyone who thinks that Marriage hasn't been redefined on a constant basis just doesn't know the history of Marriage. The true reason that conservative leaders oppose Gay marriage is that it undermines what is left of the hierarchal authority a man is still afforded in practice over his wife. If men marry each other than who is in charge in the marriage? If women marry each other then neither can be in charge. How can a marriage work without someone in a position of authority over the other. If gay marriage shows that two people can be married without one controlling the other... there goes what's left of 'traditional roles in marriage' for conservatives. Opposing gay marriage is really about oppressing woman in marriage.

The history of marriage goes back many years. The belief of two individuals uniting has been around fer days. It is just that a vast majority appreciates the thought of a man and woman together in marriage. It does not make it right or wrong. It is the majority. Millions of good people, may think that you are pissing on Christianity when you call for open marriages. Give them their due. Why cant gays have a secular union. A marriage of equal but different unions?

and bear in mind, he's interviewing hardcore punk skinheads...<p>
http://tinyurl.com/5m4oaa <p>
Bruno: Do you have a message for the Austrian gay community?<p>
Skinhead: "Fucking what?"<p>I mean, that's classic shit. he was fearless, even back then...

That's what I leaned from watching this movie. And it's so revealing when the people in this movie get upset at having gay sex forced on them by Bruno! Totally shows what homophobes they are!! I mean, when a stranger tries to force gay sex on me I'm cool with it, not being a homophobe and all.

...then you have been conditioned to be that way. It is no more natural than the Muslim who vomits because he comes into contact with pork, or believes that he has.
Disgust is a conditioned response, shaped by society and related to things that may once have represented a biological threat, but do so no more. People who horrified by gays are the same people who cannot look at blood, and are more squeamish generally. this has been scientifically documented. people who react to gays violently are more likey to respond sexually to images of people of the same sex as themselves. This has also been scientifically documented.
Gays are born with a naturally occurring sexual drive, powerful or weak, which is related to hormonal levels in the womb and may be acted on or repressed based on the society in which they live. in order to be happy and complete human beings, which it the only moral thing to want for them, you have to accept them and allow them to do the things that will fulfil their emotional and sexual needs. ther is no other ethically sound argument.
And asking people not kiss is emotionally callous and sadistic.

It is a construct. It is not scared and no amount of time (a tiny amount of time, really, in the grand scheme of life on Earth) hallows it in one form. Most of the things that people venerate about marriage and the family are fantasies, painstakingly constructed in the minds of people, magnified and marketed by the media and art (romance, true love, first love, the innocence of children, the miracle of birth, the sanctity of all life, the widom of the elderly, the nurturing mother, the strong and instructive father, the endless bond of marital bliss) all these things are in people's heads; we live up to them but they never pan out exactly as we might expect. They are ideas. they are not real, no matter how much we might wish they were. You can work towards them but they are not intrinsic to human existence. You can do without one, many or all of them: as many people do. Don't assume that becasue it sounds good to you, it has to be so.

Does this mean that you get angry when it's clear that a gay man is hitting on you? Becaus that's not reasonable. It really is not. Women have had to put up with your neanderthal antics, not to mention endless rape and sexual harassment, for centuries. They still do. So consider that guy staring at you in the street as reparations for your crimes against women. Deal with it, pussies.

the anti-intellectualism of Anglo culture is one of the greatest stumbling blocks in our societies. I can't beleive a smart, cultivated man like Obama got elected. The more socially soccessful thing you can do in an English speaking country is pretend to be stupid and pour scorn on art and philosophy. And, coincicidentally, it's linked to homophobia; English speaking men have long consdidered art and intellectualism to be effete and unmanly. the days when a gentleman could fight, write poetry, argue a delicately shaded conversation, paint and draw and appreaciate art, are long over. Why doesn't anyone any to be a Renaiassance man anymore? Shakespeare, Leonardo and Michaelangelo were queers.

...HETEROSEXUALS, as per Prop 8, you're okay with that? Betcha ain't. It's interesting that the only states that legalized gay marriage were the ones that didn't allow it to be put to the vote. So you'd better examine what you mean by "we".

Certainly your lauded CBO should. Here's a comment on its "accuracy" by The Tax Foundation:
"CBO’s yet-again revised deficit projection should not come as a surprise. The fact of the matter is that, while drastic, such swings in fiscal projections are par for the course. Fiscal forecasting is fraught with difficulties. Margins of error of 50 percent or greater are typical."
Being gullible is tough, I know, but you gotta own it and move on.

It's very simple kid's!
gather round as uncle Samplelord will tell you a story....
Most great mammals in nature are hetero by design, simply because that's the only way to create little mammals.
Sexual orientation is is pre-destined, even in mankind.
The difference between humans and animals is that humans can choose against it's natural instincts, even be raised to ignore them completely...
The male/female coupling is the only way to create life in higher mammels.
Being homosexual in any form is a choice, since homosexuality can not create life and has no support in nature.
Now kid's...don't worry, Uncle Samplelord has no issue with homosexuality.
The thing that bug's me is the "I'm born with it" or "It's natural".
If your born with it...that would mean that your a freak of nature, since you are not attracted to the opposite sex, you will have no offspring thus ending your species/bloodline...which is like bloodline suicide.
The same applies for it's natural.
If it was, there would be no life on this planet.
People should enjoy their life with who ever they please (as long as it is legal) but should not confuse their desire and feelings with fact...

Saying that changing the meaning of marriage from between male and female to any two people doesn't weaken its core relevance and resonance is absurd. Of course it does. What is more primal and more essential to any species than the male/female bond? And how primal and essential are same-sex bonds by comparison? Face it, in the grand scheme of nature, they're pretty irrelevant, and if gay coupling disappeared off the face of the earth the human race wouldn't exactly perish. That's just brutal truth...own it and move on. Having said that, however, I think that civil unions are fine and dandy and should be offered as an ALTERNATIVE to an ALTERNATIVE bond. What is "homophobic" about that? It's logical, it's truthful, and it's fair. And screw that "conditioning" crap. I learned about homosexuality in a very factual manner as a kid and my first instinct - INSTINCT - was along the lines of "WTF???". Prior to that, I hadn't heard a damn thing about homosexuality. Not even in the church my parents made me go to. I think that in truth, most people would have to be *conditioned* to regard it with nonchalance. Which of course is exactly what the Thought Police are attempting to do, here on this message board and elsewhere. I pity their travail. But I don't agree with their goal. And as for the movie - feh - Sacha is trying to outdo Andy Kaufman, and aside from his work on "Taxi" I didn't care for HIS schtick either. *shrug*

I find it so hilarious that guys who are disgusted by gays think that their opinions on a subject they don't actually know anything about even matter. I find it hilarious that straight people think they have the right to decide whether what gays feel inside is natural or a choice. I find it hilarious that anyone still believes that religious freaks or anyone else has the right to deny taxpaying gay citizens a civil right of partnership, (interracial marriage wasn't decided by votes either geniuses, it would still be illegal in many places if it had been. Civil rights don't get decided by votes. We'd still have slavery in some states if it did.)
Basically I find this whole talkback hilarious and much funnier than I will probably find the film.

The fact of the matter is that any mammal population has a percentage of homosexuality that almost always hovers just around 10 percent. Given the power of the sex drive and its association with psychology as opposed to pure bodily function, you don't know jack shit. You're telling me people make a choice to watch the Tony awards and smoke menthols? Yeah right.

the church that taught you that only a man and woman united in marriage can express physical union as some sacred bond, an urge which totally goes against every instinct programmed into the human being. which is why the marriage rate is hovering around 2/3s in divorce maybe?

Geez dude, you are really drinking the Kool-Aid. I'd say the number of straight marriages that reflect your "primal and essential" bond is pretty low. The only bond between a man and woman that's primal and essential is sex. There is a biological imperative close to what you describe. Marriage is purely a societal construct and as such can be - and has been, many times - modified to reflect societal changes.

He's a p.r. parasite a la Jesse Jackson and even less a political icon than Oliver Stone. Upon wrapping JFK, Stone landed a gig on NIGHTLINE: "The FBI are on my tail, I'm faced with death threats; I arrived at your studio with maximum security." The host, a reliably biased Ted Koppel, was buying into it. Really pathetic. Cohen and Stone profess to be delivering political platitudes (camouflaged as "entertainment"); in reality, they're riding the coattails of William (THE TINGLER) Castle. Promotion=visibility=$$$.

Humans can make choices.
That's what makes us different.
Most homosexuals are not born but conditioned, people born with certain hormonal imbalance are of the same percentage as animals, as said before around 10%.
More than 10% of humanity is gay, so yes people do choose to be gay.
Psychology and sexdrive both play a role in sexual orientation more so in humans than animals.
The animals that you call gay are a rare minority and not something to prove a point with.
Face the fact's, it has everything to do with choice...
Convicts are not born gay yet 70% has sex with another man.
That's 70% percent of all prisons around the globe...that a lott of men who made a choice...

I cited a respected bipartisan governmental source. You cited a ridiculous super conservative organization. I feel pretty good with my data.<p>especially since, if you actually understand real economics (which I'd be surprised if you do) the Tax Foundation is pretty shitty:<p> http://tinyurl.com/mwemj4 <p>just googling shit without understanding it is a bitch, huh?<p>
oh, by the bye...here are a bunch of other article/sites that clearly show how huge an economic impact legalizing gay marriage would have. you can oppose it, that's your right, but you need to do so on an ideological basis. the economic argument holds no water at all...honestly, just don't even try. arguing that legalizing gay marriage would somehow hurt the economy is like arguing that the Titanic didn't sink, but rather flew up into the sky after hitting the iceberg. it's ridiculous. truly ridiculous. if you let millions of people suddenly get married, it helps he economy, period. to argue otherwise is ludicrous.<p>
http://tinyurl.com/5wpcs4 <p>
http://tinyurl.com/kqkdld <p>
http://tinyurl.com/nslxlk <p>
you don't want to argue logic with me, kiddo. you're out of your weight class. stick with what you're best at, regurgitating the same simple minded rhetoric you learned as a kid. "I learned about gays, and I Was like, WTF!!!"<p>going the way of the dodo, indeed.

I find straights that oppose the gays from marrying to be hilarious. The same people that fail in marriage 50% of the time feel it is their duty to retrict others from giving it a try. I guess the sanctity of a man/woman bond is still there long after the bond evaporates.

I totally agree with you. I don't want to see a straight couple making out on the street corner any more than I want to see a gay couple making out on a street corner. Even my lesbian friends can't figure out gay men because they know they uust push PDA to piss people off.

So I am repeating what others have already stated. But wasn't there a study done with a population of lab rats that the more crowed they got the greater the percentage of homosexual relationships that developed? Could it be with the human population of the planet there may be a biological mechanism in play? Nature's way of telling us to slow down breeding wise?

go to paris and you'll see attractive couples making out on the street all the time and awesome beautiful euro juggs unensnared in bras all over the city. stop being so fucking uptight. are you maybe just pissed off cause no one's macking on you?

although i can see the benefits<p> you buy your bf a sweater...he doesnt like it...you get to keep it<p> i like how so many people are uncomfortable with the gay sex that appears in this movie...but if it was lesbian sex, they would be pulling down their pants and stroking it....fucking hypocrites

Just a little. I mean if we weren't, we'd be having gay sex all the time because of our sex drives. Why bother having sex with a woman when she's going to end up pregnant for nine months when I can just get it on with my buddy who's not going to be a total hormonal headcase. How we deal with those feelings and accept and tolerate that behavior in others should be taught. I don't care how open-minded or liberal you are, two dudes even just being a little affectionate with each other you're not thinking "That's awesome!" You're a little uncomfortable but you have just to accept it and have a "To each his own" attitude.

If you say you are against terrorists plotting against the US, then you secretly are a member of the Taliban. If you have a bunch of Michigan Wolverines bumper stickers on your car, then you actually are a raging Ohio Buckeyes fan! Why can't you admit it? If you say you're not a fan of asparagus, that means you actually LOVE asparagus! (I know how the system works.)

To all you mongoloid fucks complaining that you aren't AFRAID of homosexuals, you merely DETEST them, you obviously have no real understanding of the argument.<br><br>You are free to loathe the sight, even the existence, of homosexual acts. Everyone is equally free to loathe the sight of penises, vaginas, both, neither, or any acts involving any or all of the above. Some men sodomize their wives; other (straight) men are repulsed by (heterosexual) sodomy. Some men like to cum on their girlfriends' faces, or talk dirty to them, while to other men saying "you little blond slut" in bed would be an enormous turn-off.<br><br>The point is you can FEEL however you like about something, but when you try to (or merely espouse the idea to) enforce or prohibit such acts you are crossing a line.<br><br>You firmly believe that you can say two men kissing is disgusting and shouldn't be seen in public, and you are unable to acknowledge that feelings to the contrary are equally meritorious. This is because you are unable to see that your aversion stems from a close-minded conservative viewpoint inculcated into you by someone or something in your environment: your parents, teachers, church, older brother, whatever. My disgust at seeing a penis enter a vagina is just as worthy of existence as your abhorrence at the idea of two male tongues intertwining.<br><br>And for whoever it was who said that gay men must be homophobic because they don't like the idea of lesbian acts, you proved your own argument wrong (fucking idiot). Of course gay men don't get off on lesbian sex, but gay men go to gay bars and see lesbians and get along with them fine. We don't clamour to have them banned or censured.

that makes any kind of point. I can understand making a character out of someone's worst dreams, BUT, this character goes beyond that into annoying. It's not the fact that he's gay that makes people upset, it's that an annoying man is getting in your personal space and annoying you!

It isn't just my sex drive that compels me. I bust a nut when I see luscious female titties and trim and big eyes and lips and a lack of an adam's apple. Conversely, when I see gay people go at it, it's no big deal. Doesn't do anything for me, doesn't scare me or disgust me. It's just people doing their thing to each other. That's how I know I'm not gay - I don't have any reaction at all to dudes doing it. In fact, the funniest thing about seeing gay porn is how it makes straight porn look ridiculous if you watch it as a straight guy. Without the context of being turned on its so fucking goofy and over the top.

is that he should've taken down the fashion industry and exposed all the bullshit in there for what it is, as he did when he originally creatd Bruno. Getting a rise of rednecks isn't that funny cause everyone knows they're homophobic. But Bruno getting fashion designers to say what they're doing is more important than world peace that shit was funny.

Overpopulation now threatens the destruction of the planet. From an evolutionary perspective, how can you argue with that? If you want marriage to retain some sort of antiquated religious meaning, separate it from privilege in social institutions.

Leave marriage alone IMO
Have tolerance for my POV too
I really hate liberal wackos and this site has become a cesspool of political propaganda. It's dying. It's no longer on the cutting edge. They are days late behind a lot of other good sites that keep their politics OUT of it. Moriarty was smart to jump this sinking ship

Hate is the fight instinct kicking in when you are afraid. You do not hate what you do not fear. If you hate gay people it is because you are afraid of them. I personally think that most people are afraid of gay people because they don't know gay people. And some are afraid because they had a homosexual experience as a child that they are ashamed and confused about. It's not nice, but when people accuse a gay hater of secretly being gay, it's playing the odds that the person had a homosexual encounter at some point and are terrified that it means that they are gay. It's kind of dickheaded to fuck with people like that, but I kind of understand why some people do it when I see how abusive gay haters are to gay people.

The world could use more gays. With bullshit shows like Jon and Kate and 18 Kids and Counting, the world has way too many people. There are millions of kids looking to be adopted and people use fertility drugs to spit out septuplets and octuplets. With the number of people who die from disease, violence, and starvation, it is insane that in a couple of years the planet will reach 7 billion people. Gays? Shit let's have more of them.

some funny stuff but the pacing was pretty bad. It felt really rushed,some of those scenes should have played longer and slower. There could have been more build-up in the swinger party, for instance. That was some spectacularly uncomfortable footage, there must have been more that could have been included. The TV talkshow where he introduced "OJ" was a good example of staying with the scene for a long enough time. Even the finale in Arkansas must have had more footage that could have been edited in, it just felt rushed.

I think you're a mite confused as to what marriage actually is. Marriage is a celebration and sanctification of the primal sexual bond you speak of. It transfigures it into more than a physical act and enshrines it as the foundation of families. And the "societal changes" to marriage that you mention did not change the fundamental meaning of it - the nature-ordained bond between male and female. Gay marriage threatens to do that and so a lot of folks get upset about that. And you know what, that's the vast majority of Americans and their voices deserve to be heard and their choice put to the vote. That's what happened in California, and citizens living in other states ought to have that chance too. And they deserve to express that vote without being called "homophobes" if they don't vote the way you want them to. I haven't heard an outcry of Prop 8 supporters against those who voted against it - certainly not the name-calling and personal attacks. Oh, and when I went to church, I mostly slept throught it, or doodled pictures on the backs of pews, or daydreamed, stuff like that. If the church was trying to "condition" me it failed miserably, because I haven't set foot in a church in years. Children aren't quite the blank slate some think they are or - tellingly - wish they were. I think most kids would react the way I did. And conditioning usually backfires anyway. Remember when people tried to get boys to play with dolls and the boys wound up waving their dollies around and yelling "Bang bang"? Anatomy really is pretty much destiny, dude. Deal with it.

You know what really threatens heterosexual marriages...divorce and annulments. You want to really strengthen marriage then fight to have those two things banned. We will then really see how many people really love the institution of marriage.

No, MARRIAGE is the sanction of true love between two people. Has been, always will. Gay marriage seeks to undo that? You've never seen old reruns of the "Newlywed Game"?? So, should we undo the marriages of "convenience"? The straight woman who marries a straight illegal immigrant just to make him legal? The unwed teens getting married "shotgun style" by their parents to make it "legit" in the eyes of others? If marriage is based on the notion of Nature's Sanctioned Way of Reproducing, should we then not allow senior citizens, who've lost their mates of many decades, from marrying 'cause they only "love" each other, but have no intention of ever having sex? The fact that I'm married to another guy (yes, legally, in my state), has nothing to do with me hating religion or societal institutions or straight people. It was out of "love". 25+ years of love, which, I suspect, is longer than you've been roaming this planet. Oh, yeah. So you haven't heard an outcry from the Prop 8 supporters. Of course not. THEY won! But if you really were in CA (were Prop 8 won), you WOULD'VE heard much moaning and weeping by supporters of how now their being persecuted, made victims, for simply acting upon their beliefs. And again, see my (much) earlier post on homophobia. "Phobia" does NOT always mean "fear off". It can also mean an "irrational dislike". And I'm SO sorry that you've based your sex life on "anatomy". The "missionary position" gets pretty boring after a while, no? You need to grow up, see a bigger world, and not be so full of hate. Deal with it.

The reason I seem "a mite confused" about it is because you are wrong. So if someone's disagreeing with you, you assume they must be confused. But your definition of marriage is very nice, a nice little idea. Not real, mind you, but nice.<p>However, the idea that you had an inborn sense that man + woman is RIGHT and man + man is WRONG is ludicrous.

his old wife, his new wife, his brother who died's wife, and like half a dozen handmaidens? I think the definition has probably changed a few times.</p>
<p>The more I think about Bruno the more I love it. Because of what it stands for. And it does stand for something. You just have to let it settle to realize it. </p>

If it wasn't for gay marriage, abortion and affirmative action the republicans would be a permanent minority party in this country since their economic policies favor only the top 1% and even then as we've seen with the recent economic collapse even the wealthy people in our society end up getting screwed by supply-side Reagonomics. The only way the GOP can get middle and lower income people in their party is by scaring them about gay rights and gay marriage and abortion. We'll never see gay marriage passed in a majority of states in our lifetimes - why even bother to push this as an issue. Bush Jr. doesn't even get 40% of the vote in 2004 without gay marriage.

A MAN AND A WOMAN. Traditionally speaking, that is. Haven't you been paying attention? "Between two people" is the NEW definition of marriage gay marriage supporters are trying to force onto everybody else. Unfortunately for them, most people aren't buying it. And it's not "ludicrous" that most people don't feel comfortable about homosexuality when they're first exposed to it. Nor is it homophobic. It's just the truth. Sounds like YOU'VE been the victim of a certain amount of conditioning. You might want to consider what people in the past have been conditioned into believing. It can be dangerous. Take care.

(who is neither) To quote Buzz Lightyear "You're a strange little man, and I pity you. Good night". 'Cause you know what? The two of us could go on and on and on, but in the end, we're not going to change the other's mind. May God's blessing be upon you, as well upon me and other like me. Only time well tell. Hate, FeralAngel, will not win out in any dispute. No matter how "sure" you feel on your position, and I mean that for both of us. Only, I only have no "hate" for those who dislike the idea of gay marriage. Hate has no place in my heart. Only time. And, I feel, as a free individual, that my heart will win out. "So you think we all have a choice...". And to reiterate, THIS SITE WAS, AT LEAST AT FIRST, DISCUSSING MOVIES. Can we please get back to that?

Didn't Hitler hate gays, just like he hated Jews and everyone else that didn't fit his notion of a Master Race? I doubt he'd go for the idea of civil unions, even. You people of the left have really got to stop painting people with a broad brush. It kind of negates your boasting about being tolerant and open-minded and so on. Also makes you look pretty damn silly.

Fascism is very evil. However, I wasn't the one who alluded that favoring gay marriage is something that only conditioning can create. I also didn't say that history shows that conditioning can be dangerous. Hitler tried to dictate what is correct. I want people to have equal rights. Hitler wanted to deny certain people rights.

I am a very avid fan of Sascha Baron Cohen, including Ali G, Bruno and Borat. I was really looking forward to Bruno, but it was a disappointment on many levels. Too short, too plot driven, too shock-value, not enough comedy bits, almost exact same plot as Borat. Sigh.

Didn't I mention I haven't set foot in a church in years? I've got no more use for the kind of "conditioning" churches offer than I have for thought police, social engineering or political correctness. I like to collect the facts and then think things through on my own, and not get nagged at by preachers of any stripe, religious, political or otherwise. Oh, well, at least *you* flung quotes from a cartoon at me instead of from a Bible. I must say it's refreshing. Good night to you, sir!

...is deviant and wrong. Cumming in the ass or rubbing clits does not lead to LIFE.
We're living in the end times, folks. Not hard to see that. Evil is being called good, great and horrible things are happening and no one is doing shit to stop it (abortion).
So libs, keep defending your leftist crazy ways and know your day is coming. Right-wingers, you piss and moan and bark. Where's your bite?
Look at the Catholics and Obama. The man is a certifiable, card-carrying infanticidal maniac. The Catholic Church claims to want abortion to end. Yet NO ONE in the CC leadership, esp. not the Pope, took a stand and said what they really teach, which is "You vote a person into power who does shit we consider wrong, you are as responsible as they are for that wrong."
And as for Sacha whatever, fuck him and his deviant ways. He wants to give money to and raise awareness of gay causes with this movie? The world is pretty much fucked up the ass with regards to the gay issue, pun intended.
Fuck him, and fuck you liberal deviant cunts who support him and the evil shit that Hollywood excretes into your waiting, baby-birds mouths.
Oh, and Harry...fuck you too!
Doc

A good night to you as well. Yeah, cartoon quotes say so much more than those "what the???" biblical ones. And, just so you know, I haven't set foot in a church in over a decade, either. Just going on a gut feeling, you know? Take care, get some rest. But here's something I recommend to everyone I know (gay, straight, bi, geek, etc): Pick a place you've never heard anyone travel to. Make THAT your destination. Do some research on it first, of course (avoid war zones and such, you know?). But, almost on a whim, go there. I'm not saying this to change your mind on homos; just that you impress me, now, as an intelligent person. It won't change your mind set. But it will expand your horizons. And, I promise, you'll have one hell of'a time. Sleep tight, my friend. Sweet dreams.

It doesn't matter what is deviant and wrong as long as you remember to tell Jesus that you are sorry and promise never to do it again every time you do it. Right?!? Seriously though. The 'end of times'... you do realize that the USA is not in the bible, right? You can't figure out that the world is going to end by judging a country that has nothing to do with what the bible says about the end of times. And for the record... the bible says that everything will be normal before the end comes. Nothing will indicate that it is about to happen. It will just happen out of nowhere. Like a thief in the night. You have actually read the bible, haven't you? Or are you just preaching what other's have told you? Try reading for yourself. You'll learn a few things. Like how God is all powerful and doesn't need you to enforce his will on other people. I know that ignorant sheep like you think that God is some impotent impatient bi-polar crybaby that just really needs to be adored and feared. Like you. But God is all powerful and he's got things under control just fine. You can sit back and trust that he gets what he wants when he wants it without help from little ol' you.

Learn what the term means. Neocons are only really conservative on security issues. Squishes like Frum could care less about social issues. The writers on this site must be paid by the amount of times they can use the words Neocon and Homophobia (another word misused).

July 12, 2009, 8:50 a.m. CST

by DDMAN26

I think Sacha Baron Cohen is extremely funny and extremely talented. I consider the first 45 minutes of Borat(the movie loses a little in the last half) to be take your breath away funny. In fact when I saw the film my girlfriend shushed me I was laughing so hard.
And I'm glad that he does expose the prejudices that so many of us have.
But as far as Bruno is concerned that doesn't mean I'm going to enjoy a movie where a guy simulates overtly gay acts like spitting up semen and licking a guys ass. That doesn't make me a homophobe, it just doesn't appeal to me as being smart or funny.

from "Bruno" with their hard-on for Megan Fox. That shit would leave "Titanic" and "The Dark Knight" in the dust at the box office. The only problem is that there'd be millions of teenage boys rubbing one out in the theaters, hurting the owners' profits by upping the clean-up bill.

"there isn't a straight man alive who doesn't present a tent when seeing two or more girls making out. and having grown up in an evangelical church i can definitely tell you that the boys and men in those churches are freaks. they are like dogs around a bitch in heat. that's why they hate gay people. they are so out of control of their sexual impulses that they are terrified that they get boners for pretty boys."
That would be incorrect.

Your entire argument was that homosexuals are somehow at a "disadvantage" in the eyes of God. Whether you call it an afterlife or not, the difference is one of niggling semantics. Nobody with half a brain stem gives a shit what your imaginary creator would think about them. Could you possibly be any more of a sheep?

<p>Jesse Benton was apparently fired from Bob Barr's staff after setting up the interview between him and Borat. Now that he's married to Ron Paul's granddaughter, I wonder if he'll get the same treatment.</p>
<p>Queer comments aside, Paul is more likely to let gay marriage happen than most of the so called liberal congressmen out there. At the very least, he'd leave it up to the states to decide. Libertarians make poor targets (cept Barr, who never really was one).</p>

men in tents with them. Also explain to me why it makes you "homophobic" to NOT want a naked man to get in a sleeping bag with you. I guess you'd be alright with it? As far as the term "Neo-Conservative", too many morons on this site don't know what it means. You use it as a broad brush to paint every Republican you disagree with. The literal definition of "neo-con" is someone who was once liberal but now is conservative. They usually are still pretty moderate on some issues but have changed their philosophy on foreign policy. It doesn't make sense to call Bush or Cheney "neo-cons". It's been demonized to try to be a bad word to desribe everyone who isn't liberal. It makes no sense to call someone who has been conservative their entire adult life a "neo-con". But like I said, one more time, it doesn't make someone a "homophobe" to not want naked men they don't know rubbing all over them or being lied to and having someone disrobe in front of you (even though I do consider Ron Paul a racist and homophobe, it's not fair what was done to him). Having said all that, I still want to see the movie and will probably go tonight. I can still laugh at the situations (I thought Borat was pretty funny), but don't have to agree with the politics alot of you idiots are trying to impose on this film...

I'm gay, I loved the movie ... and I fully agree with you about the hunters. I didn't think that scene was particularly funny or incisive/expository, and I didn't even think Bruno did anything particularly controversial. Everyone's made a huge deal out of it ("omg he could have been shot") but the scene did almost nothing for me.